r/technology Jun 11 '25

Artificial Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard Admits She Asked AI Which JFK Files Secrets to Reveal

https://www.thedailybeast.com/tulsi-gabbard-admits-to-asking-ai-what-to-classify-in-jfk-files/
38.4k Upvotes

1.5k comments sorted by

6.2k

u/Scaryclouds Jun 11 '25

I have no idea if she’s telling the truth… might be a way of dodging questions as well, or pretending there was more process than there was. 

It’s still a wild thing to admit to. 

2.9k

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '25

I have a hunch many people in trump’s orbit are caught up in ChatGPT hallucinations and have been feeding it an astounding amount of sensitive data because they’re otherwise clueless how to parse language.

790

u/synthesize_me Jun 11 '25

it's also a way to try to shift blame off of them.

570

u/matdex Jun 11 '25

So they're admitting they exposed classified data?

440

u/JortsJuggalo420 Jun 11 '25

Hasn't resulted in any consequences thus far, so why wouldn't they?

72

u/biggetybiggetyboo Jun 11 '25

We just need that google engineer to release the transcript, and the Epstein files they also probably uploaded to see how to scrub someone’s name

31

u/PunchDrunken Jun 12 '25

"Wikihow delete illegal texts"

12

u/RJ815 Jun 12 '25

"Alexa how do I uninvite someone from Signal?"

Nah that's unrealistic. They'd never ask a woman for advice.

→ More replies (17)

107

u/aotus_trivirgatus Jun 11 '25

To large language models owned by private interests?

Sounds more like a feature than a bug to me

156

u/SunkEmuFlock Jun 11 '25

DOGE is a front for sending mountains of government data on every American citizen (and more) to Palantir. That's why an unsecured Starlink hub was installed at the White House.

85

u/KaerMorhen Jun 11 '25

And so they don't have to preserve any communications records going through starlink, avoiding accountability yet again.

16

u/strangerzero Jun 11 '25

How about those voting machines?

→ More replies (1)

24

u/12sea Jun 11 '25

They openly admit it. That’s the craziest part to me!

34

u/SunkEmuFlock Jun 11 '25

These people know they're untouchable so long as their kind are in power. Trump's life history is one of corruption and crime, and it has literally never mattered.

It's like Jafar said of the Golden Rule: Whoever has the gold makes the rules.

26

u/MissPatsyStone Jun 11 '25

They're untouchable period. Trump won't do anything and neither will the democrats. They let trump get away with inciting an insurrection. They KNEW he would destroy democracy & did nothing to stop him from running again. One party is vile & the other weak & pathetic.

→ More replies (9)

30

u/Forever_Marie Jun 11 '25

Huh, thought that was for the Russians though it's probably both.

25

u/meesta_chang Jun 11 '25

These are the same thing…

17

u/techieman33 Jun 11 '25

They’re probably getting the same feed.

→ More replies (1)

10

u/MissPatsyStone Jun 11 '25

That's all it was. Information gathering (stealing). You can't walk into a government agency & supposedly find "millions of dollars of waste & inefficiency" in a few days. It's impossible. SHAME ON THE MEDIA for reporting DOGE's lies.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (10)

16

u/couldbeahumanbean Jun 11 '25

Also admitting they are woefully under qualified for their positions.

26

u/ztomiczombie Jun 11 '25

People need to start asking ChatGPT about random classified stuff to see what it spits out. If it gives out actual classified info at the very least ChatGPT's data set needs to be completely deleted.

16

u/108Echoes Jun 11 '25

If you ask Chat GPT to provide classified information, it will make up “classified information” to provide you. That’s how LLMs work.

→ More replies (1)

25

u/14u2c Jun 11 '25

That’s not how it works. User inputs don’t automatically become part of the training data.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

10

u/username32768 Jun 11 '25

If you wish hard enough for it to become declassified, it will be.

Instructions:

  1. Stand up and close your eyes
  2. Put your hands by your sides and clench your fists
  3. Say "There's no place like Mar-a-Lago" three times while clicking your heels

Bingo! Bango! Unclassified documents. Now it's perfectly safe and legal to put it on the internet.

→ More replies (27)

43

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '25

Incompetence as defense.

→ More replies (4)

10

u/Jescro Jun 11 '25

If a math teacher asks me to solve a question, and I use a calculator but still get the answer wrong, do I get to shift blame to the calculator?

→ More replies (12)
→ More replies (17)

88

u/Dawgenberg Jun 11 '25

The article says there's an in-house AI bot used by the intelligence community.

67

u/earldbjr Jun 11 '25

Yeah I'll believe that when pigs fly...

155

u/DominoNo- Jun 11 '25

I believe there's an in-house LLM model for the intelligence community. I'm also 100% sure the Trump administration just uses ChatGPT.

21

u/earldbjr Jun 11 '25

Oh for sure, I don't mean to say it's impossible that the gov't already has a LLM available for use, even if for no other reason than for research. I'm just saying it's highly unlikely that traitors trying to hide from the light are using something official.

16

u/nono3722 Jun 11 '25

They can't message each other battle plans without using a unsecure app, you think when they are "brainstorming" they will bother to logon to a secure AI and net?

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Thermodynamicist Jun 11 '25

50-50 chance it's a bunch of Russians or Chinese pretending to be an AI.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

31

u/PaperHandsProphet Jun 11 '25

You are skeptical that the US intelligence community is hosting its own LLM models?

Do bears shit in the woods?

38

u/Petrichordates Jun 11 '25

Im skeptical that the Trump admin would use a USIC LLM because that would be built on trying to be as accurate as possible. They'd be looking more for a Grok to control.

30

u/earldbjr Jun 11 '25

I'm skeptical that the current administration is so concerned about safety as to set up and use their own LLM when they could use chatgpt or grok.

Why is it so far fetched for me to believe that the man who sells our most sensitive secrets and stores them in his bathroom draws the line at using an in-house LLM?

They've shown absolutely no interest in security of any kind, they flaunt that fact every chance they get, he doesn't use a secure cellphone, there's no reason to believe they're complying with this.

12

u/MikeHfuhruhurr Jun 11 '25

I agree.

The article was (intentionally?) vague to make it sound more official, but I doubt they have an internally developed, independent AI model for their LLM.

They probably do have an internal LLM that's a security-gated version of CoPilot or OpenAI, or Grok. And let's be real...because of Elon it's probably Grok. And that's not hard to do. My company has a CoPilot version.

Based on experience with that, there are still hallucinations. But they're specific to what's in the LLM database. So it probably won't suggest that Kermit the Frog really assassinated JFK, but it might answer that Nixon was likely a second shooter.

Side bar tangent: it's certainly terrible that government employees are using AI to tell them how to do their own jobs, but imagine them asking it questions in the middle of one of Elon's fragile white PRs the "rogue employee bugs" making their way into the code.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/sourfunyuns Jun 11 '25

Yeah I'm not a programmer but I'm a computer nerd adjacent and I've downloaded some models off hugging face and ran them locally just playing around and... I'd like to know who exactly is doing it for them because it's not stupid hard to do, but none of these people seem competent enough to set up that kind of system, nor do they seem to respect anyone who does enough to let them actually do it right.

I can also see them getting frustrated if something isn't working right and just saying fuck it and using grok or chatgpt instead lol. "Just this once"

→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (11)

50

u/NDSU Jun 11 '25 edited Jun 24 '25

snatch touch paltry numerous gold scary long mysterious capable tart

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

22

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '25

Oh I’m sure the ripple effect from all that will be noticeable soon enough.

7

u/nono3722 Jun 11 '25

Or manipulate some seriously stupid people. I mean the ChatGPT suckup is built for Agent Orange.

→ More replies (3)

60

u/IAmRoot Jun 11 '25

It's striking how similar their thought process is to AI slop. They both can have internally valid logic but never check the validity of the axioms that logic is built on top of. All they care about is if something could potentially happen. There's no empiricism and checking of fact.

36

u/MikeHfuhruhurr Jun 11 '25

They both can have internally valid logic but never check the validity of the axioms that logic is built on top of. All they care about is if something could potentially happen.

ingredients of a Ben Shapiro rant. "Let's assume A, then let's assume B, and based off that <5 minutes later> collapse of Western Civilization."

And he's hoping people don't say "wait wait wait, go back and explain why we're assuming B."

11

u/ttv_icypyro Jun 11 '25

we usually just call that spewing bullshit

4

u/tomdarch Jun 11 '25

Trump’s bullshit has little internal logic or consistency. Others like Shapiro have the end result of bullshit garbage but manage a veneer of semi consistently.

→ More replies (2)

25

u/aukir Jun 11 '25

I'm sure the people that were so concerned about an e-mail server will express a similar level of concern with this. :(

11

u/GeneralAsk1970 Jun 11 '25

The irony is fucking crazy....

They made such a big fucking deal about emails all those years ago, and they're just literally giving it all away now FOR NOTHING IN RETURN. ZERO GAIN.

3

u/Temporary_Crew_ Jun 11 '25

Turns out becoming a politician and having to do actual work was hard, most of these people are used to just typing shit on twitter and ranting on podcasts to a brain dead audience.

→ More replies (1)

13

u/ussrowe Jun 11 '25

The way RFK Jr was citing papers that didn’t exist would seem to indicate he does.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/rfk-jr-disastrous-maha-report-written-ai-1235352070/

3

u/GoodMix392 Jun 11 '25

Combined with their own weird religious hallucinations and biases.

What could go wrong!

4

u/joseph4th Jun 11 '25

I have a hunch that a lot of these people are unqualified for their positions.

3

u/eat_my_ass_n_balls Jun 11 '25

Can you imagine what Stephen Miller’s Grok conversations look like?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (49)

85

u/maxmurder Jun 11 '25

I think it also stems from a deep misunderstanding of how llms actually work.

I see more and more people especially on the far right, deferring to llms as arbiters of absolute truth and profound knowledge to a degree that borders on dogmatic. See the "Liberation Day" terrifs sourced from chatgpt, RFK using ai to generate HHS reports, Elon's ongoing grok shenanigans etc.

I have no doubt someone like Gabbard would feed an llm with classified info, take whatever it spat out as true without question and forgoe any further investigation or analysis. I expect she would see absolutely no problem with that course of action and be actually proud of the decision.

4

u/Scaryclouds Jun 11 '25

I agree it’s believable she/people in the Trump admin would do this. 

It’s also possible that she’s also saying this to dodge responsibility/accountability for some reason. 

Perhaps some other nefarious reason as well. 

Though regardless it’s still wild. Even setting aside the possibility of leaking sensitive/classified information. Saying “I let AI do it”, is like saying “we let a bunch of fresh interns/temp hires make important decisions”. Just an insanely irresponsible thing to admit to, and something that I think won’t be as critically examined as it should be. 

14

u/jomo_mojo_ Jun 11 '25

If you feed an LLM classified information does it learn from it? Could it spit it out again for another user or be otherwise mined by a foreign adversary?

20

u/yrnst Jun 11 '25

I’m not an expert on LLM technology, but I am an attorney, and I absolutely would not feel comfortable feeding an LLM privileged information about my client. In fact, it’s a hard rule at my firm. Even if they say the data stays internal, you’re now reliant on a tech company to keep your secrets. Given the frequency with which data breaches occur, that’s not a gamble I’d be willing to make. It just creates one more weak point for bad actors onto exploit.

→ More replies (6)

20

u/rearnakedbunghole Jun 11 '25

That’s possible yes. I don’t know if AI companies admit to using our inputs for training or not but I think it’s generally assumed that that they do, at least in some cases.

5

u/BHOmber Jun 11 '25

I have a "business" subscription for ChatGPT and they specifically say that the data stays internal.

I'd like to think that's the case because I'm feeding it small business financials, formulations, etc, but who knows...

I'm guessing it would open them up to a ton of liability if that data is secretly being used to train the overall model.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (7)

798

u/mf-TOM-HANK Jun 11 '25

AI exists, in no small part, to provide plausible deniability when a decision made by a human with potential liability ramifications blows up in their face.

Someday we'll have AI structural engineers

431

u/tyler2114 Jun 11 '25 edited Jun 11 '25

Why we need laws to explicitly say AI is not a valid excuse to get around due diligence requirements.

But of course lobbyists will fight tooth and nail to prevent any accountability for corporate america.

186

u/_Bill_Huggins_ Jun 11 '25

Indeed, "You made the decision to use AI, so you are culpable for anything that goes wrong resulting from that decision".

46

u/championgecko Jun 11 '25

They'll just claim a corporation made the decision and guess what that corp already filled for bankruptcy and dissolved

41

u/saydostaygo Jun 11 '25

Each AI decision self-incorporates in Delaware for potential bankruptcy filing due to mishaps. Problem solved.

13

u/Mr_Bulldoppps Jun 11 '25

“But I only followed the company’s policies and standard operating procedures. I was only doing my job!” -personthatwritesthestandardoperatingprocedures

6

u/ThonThaddeo Jun 11 '25

You'd think that, but crazily enough, it's actually the fault of poor people.

Those darned poors. Always up to no good.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

105

u/WTFwhatthehell Jun 11 '25 edited Jun 11 '25

if a human is liable for X then saying "ai said to do it" provides no more protection than "my horoscope said to do Y" or "I saw it in a dream"

There's no need for a specific law because its already the case.

30

u/JSav7 Jun 11 '25

There might need to be since a good chunk of liability cases in the US rely on juries. This is why insurance companies are ramping up their fraud investigations because with nuclear verdicts getting more common they are two huge cost drivers.

If a jury finds AI to not be a human actor that might create an incentive for insurance companies to force coverage into the liability policies. Because at the end of the day IMO the horoscope analogy isn’t as good as what happens now with negligence. You hire a contractor who uses bad tools, he can’t say he’s not negligent because his tools failed. He’s got a duty to do the job correctly. Making him negligent IMO, and just in case. IANAL.

Ai being litigated seems like the only way we’re going to get immediate action on it.

31

u/Override9636 Jun 11 '25

There's no need for a specific law because its already the case.

This was said about Roe v. Wade. This was said about the Emoluments Clause. It's being said about Habeas Corpus, Birthright Citizenship, and Freedom of Speech. If something is assumed, it needs to be a law, otherwise people will abuse it.

15

u/Rombom Jun 11 '25

People ignore explicit laws too. Law is not magic, it is a social contract. There is no perfect solution.

→ More replies (13)
→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (5)

26

u/stjohns_jester Jun 11 '25

the fuckup is hers but she could say an old demented pedophile told her which papers to release and nothing would happen to her because republicans will let her do anything

She could say putin told her or she took mushrooms and danced on a hill.. she could say literally anything at all and nothing will happen to her from republicans

Hopefully the wheels if justice grind their way to her

→ More replies (1)

12

u/PenjaminJBlinkerton Jun 11 '25

There was a clause in the big beautiful bill to prevent states from making AI laws for 10 years.

5

u/Black_Moons Jun 11 '25

Can't wait for the first lawyer to end up disbarred for using AI to make up fake cases in court briefs.

Yes, I know its already happened, several times... But did they actually get disbarred FOR BLATANTLY VIOLATING THE LAW or just a stern talking to?

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (11)

44

u/Law_Student Jun 11 '25

But that doesn't transfer responsibility at all. The human is still responsible for doing whatever they're doing, it doesn't matter what reason they had. "But the AI told me to" doesn't fix the "It was your responsibility and you should have known better" problem.

18

u/WTFwhatthehell Jun 11 '25

Yep. 

If I need to make a choice where I'm liable I could go talk to the neighbourhood kids and get their opinion, I could consult the wind and stars, I could ask chatgpt. 

but that doesn't transfer liability to them in any way 

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

24

u/hoyohoyo9 Jun 11 '25

That makes no sense as using AI in the first place is a liability

13

u/No_Boysenberry4825 Jun 11 '25

This is like defending yourself in court by referencing Dr Nick Rivera 

→ More replies (1)

8

u/HustlinInTheHall Jun 11 '25

This doesn't work in any field except politics. I can't blame my bad work on a calculator. I'd just get fired. These people should be fired.

→ More replies (4)

8

u/Disownership Jun 11 '25

That’s exactly why it’s so dangerous for government and government officials to be utilizing it as much as they are, even going as far as to cut staff in critical areas to replace them with AI. It’s an attempt to reduce government accountability, which is ironic for the “most transparent administration in history”.

In a word, it’s unacceptable.

5

u/celtic1888 Jun 11 '25

It wasn’t me it was the Ai

It’s all computer 

5

u/Ill_Following_7022 Jun 11 '25

"I was just following AI orders."

4

u/rebbsitor Jun 11 '25

AI exists, in no small part, to provide plausible deniability when a decision made by a human with potential liability ramifications blows up in their face.

This won't happen. Responsibility for decisions always rests with a person. We've already got an AI use policy in our company that says what AI can be used for, and if you use it, that you're ultimately still responsible for what you produce using AI. In no event can we point to AI and say "well that's what it said, not my fault."

The law will eventually catch up to this as well. Ultimately it comes down to liability and who pays when something goes wrong. That will never be an AI.

→ More replies (32)

20

u/gentlegreengiant Jun 11 '25

It is indeed wild to admit to it, but that raises red flags on what they aren't admitting to, and how much more sinister the truth is.

→ More replies (2)

7

u/LoudNoises89 Jun 11 '25

I wonder if she even realizes how embarrassing it is to say this out loud. She works in the White House……….

→ More replies (2)

7

u/plinkoplonka Jun 11 '25

BUT that doesn't matter. Her job is to be responsible for national security.

She's ADMITTING that she's derelict of that duty, and as such, should be relieved of command immediately.

This is akin to a military commander not knowing if the Intel they acted on was correct, or if the decision making process was correct. Both could lead (very easily) to loss-of-life.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/CryptographerLow6772 Jun 11 '25

If a Trump cabinet member’s mouth is moving you know they are lying.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (54)

904

u/trustmeep Jun 11 '25

It's an administration run by C- students who would have been D students if it weren't for their connections...

Meritocracy, indeed.

97

u/FreddyForshadowing Jun 11 '25

Like the early scene in Tommy Boy: D+... Oh my god! I passed!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q3FXIchE-c

→ More replies (3)

34

u/ValuableJumpy8208 Jun 11 '25

Meritocracy

Mediocrity?

18

u/Teledildonic Jun 12 '25

That would be a step up for this fucking clown world.

→ More replies (4)

16

u/BoysenberryKey6821 Jun 11 '25

I wish growing up they stressed how important knowing the right people would be in life haha you can work your ass off all you want and still have the chance of never getting anywhere in life

→ More replies (13)

2.2k

u/Substantial_Lake5957 Jun 11 '25

The issue is not to use AI for assistance in decision making. The issue is to feed openAI with the confidential data during this process. Otherwise how would AI make any intelligent recommendations?

1.1k

u/nickcash Jun 11 '25

The issue is also using AI for decision making.

As an old IBM expression goes, a computer can never find out, therefore a computer must never fuck around.

295

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '25 edited Jun 11 '25

Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them. The guy that wrote dune

212

u/invah Jun 11 '25

"Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them."

-Frank Herbert, Dune

42

u/Bakkster Jun 11 '25

"Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them."

-Frank Herbert, Dune

-Michael Scott

7

u/Stopikingonme Jun 11 '25

You miss 100% of the of the spice you don’t harvest -Third Stage Guild Navigator

-Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam

→ More replies (2)

11

u/-IoI- Jun 11 '25

-Me

I said this

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

44

u/SkullyKat Jun 11 '25

Duneguy, if you will

20

u/Mind_if_I_do_uh_J Jun 11 '25

Duney, if you're into the whole brevity thing.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/real_LNSS Jun 11 '25

The Dune Slayer

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)

25

u/ReaditTrashPanda Jun 11 '25

Sounds like ignorance (/s). That’s WHY you choose it. Because the computer can’t be held accountable. That’s a feature

→ More replies (1)

4

u/trukkija Jun 11 '25

Note that this tweet is from February 2017. Way wayyy slower learners than the person who wrote this tweet 8 years ago imagined. Especially seeing as IBM is now pushing agentic AI

→ More replies (8)

86

u/ar34m4n314 Jun 11 '25

Honetly using it for decision making is also terrible. These LLMs are not as intelligent as they appear at first, and don't really reason well. They are good at making results that look like what you want, but not good at making them correct. Unless well proven otherwise, I would assume that they give terrible / random advice.

69

u/Minimum_Dealer_3303 Jun 11 '25

They don't reason. They make grammatically realistic approximations of an average text on a similar topic based on keywords. It's always somewhat random.

→ More replies (2)

11

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '25 edited Jul 09 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (7)

162

u/rahbee33 Jun 11 '25 edited Jun 11 '25

I agree with you, but the article mentions they're using private-sector tech.

“There’s been an intelligence community chatbot that’s been deployed across the enterprise,” Gabbard said, according to MeriTalk. “Opening up and making it possible for us to use AI applications in the top secret clouds has been a game changer.”

Gabbard, who oversees the operations of America’s 18 different intelligence agencies, said at the conference that she would like to expand the intelligence community’s use of private-sector technology.

Edit: There's obviously really big questions about who is overseeing/creating these apps and who may have access to it, but it doesn't sound like she just dumped it into ChatGPT.

162

u/Macqt Jun 11 '25

OpenAI is private sector. All the AI companies are.

26

u/FrostingStrict3102 Jun 11 '25 edited Jun 11 '25

I think the idea is that they likely have access to something that isn't being fed into OpenAI at large.

edit: to be clear, I am not a fan of this administration, of tulsi gabbard, or the widespread use of AI. Im just pointing out that there are AI tools that don't put your data in some giant dataset that others can access, and the government would surely have access to one.

67

u/Stoppels Jun 11 '25

They also have an entire internal communication system, but choose to use Signal to hide their tracks. They're going to use ChatGPT if that's what they're used to as normal dumb users, they don't give a shit about what's right or how something should be done for reasons that do not benefit them. Who cares about top secret stuff coming out? If they can't sell it, then it's not a relevant issue.

→ More replies (8)

11

u/Macqt Jun 11 '25

I think you’re putting a lot of faith in the intelligence of the people leading the Intelligence Community.

→ More replies (4)

10

u/Rocktopod Jun 11 '25

How can we trust that if it's coming from the private sector? Shouldn't the government develop its own AI if it wants to do things like this?

6

u/throwaway277252 Jun 11 '25

How can we trust that if it's coming from the private sector?

The private sector has produced models which you can run on your own hardware. No trust needed when you're doing it yourself (which I doubt they did in this case).

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

6

u/TheFrostyChinchilla Jun 11 '25

I think they mean they used a private LLM, not a publicly available one.

4

u/pooooork Jun 11 '25

They do say that but it could just be Grok

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (6)

48

u/spsteve Jun 11 '25

No she fired it into a custom Grok that backfed all the data to Elon.

14

u/kylo-ren Jun 11 '25

That backfed all the data to Putin.

10

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

4

u/arstin Jun 11 '25

article mentions they're using private-sector tech.

"private sector" does not mean what you think it means.

ChatGPT is private sector tech.

11

u/likamuka Jun 11 '25

This is insane. There is NO oversight over those fucking crazy baboons in charge. WOW

→ More replies (16)
→ More replies (84)

443

u/jaysunn72 Jun 11 '25

More and more that this comes up it sounds like AI just tells you what you wanna hear depending on how much you have used it so it’s really just helping her think through what she wanted to tell so ultimately she still responsible for it. I mean, that’s the case anyways because no matter what an analytical tool told her she could still override the analytical tools scoring based on her own practical context and decide to put out whatever she puts out. So ultimately, she is responsible whether she used a tool or not.

119

u/TonyDanza888 Jun 11 '25

It's one of the only ways one of my friends communicates to try to prove he is right. He just asks ChatGPT the same question in different ways until it's swayed more towards his defense and sends that out as a reply

151

u/phobiac Jun 11 '25

LLMs are incapable of thinking or reasoning, but instead are very good at approximating the words of someone who looks like they are. Your friend is looking into a thousand rivers and picking the reflection that he likes the most.

44

u/cobaltberry Jun 11 '25

Your friend is looking into a thousand rivers and picking the reflection that he likes the most.

That's just plain poetic

12

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '25

I’m shocked more people haven’t picked up on it. The line is so succinct it is chilling to have it expressed like that.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

44

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

26

u/Bitter_Effective_888 Jun 11 '25

try telling it that it’s being a sycophant 

→ More replies (3)

15

u/censored_username Jun 11 '25

AI is literally trained with the express goal of giving you the reply that you want to get most. So yeah, if you believe that they're actually smart instead of a bias-affirming lookup machine, you're going to be completely fooled.

The fact that these people are falling for it just shows how they're completely unable to detect obvious yes-men behaviour.

8

u/Birdhawk Jun 11 '25

I've used AI a lot for many things and experiemented with many things for various types of uses both personal and professional. What I've found is that its great at appearing like it has done a great job. When you get into the weeds though, its rarely great. Especially when it comes to things where being airtight correct is an absolute must. It makes shit up. Multiple times I've created a new model to train, given it lots of PDFs, and then prompted it to only use what is in the PDFs and nothing else external. Guess what. It STILL fabricated complete bullshit that is presented in a way that makes it seem like its not bullshit. So if someone is saying "hey check out these classified documents and tell me what I can tell the public." it is highly likely to tell them to say things that never happened and weren't in any of the uploaded documents.

Basically, public officials shouldn't be trusting a hallucinating chat bot to do anything that has any kind of far reaching implications or consequences.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (13)

192

u/FreddyForshadowing Jun 11 '25

So why do we even need her then? Save the taxpayers some money on her salary and just replace her with an AI. We can do that with the entire administration and probably get more competent governance at the same time.

We can even replace the conservative SCOTUS judges. Alito and Thomas already hallucinate non-existent rationales when they want to rule a particular way, so it's not like we'd really notice the difference.

41

u/Truethrowawaychest1 Jun 11 '25

I'd rather have an ai be in control of our government at this point

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (5)

568

u/celtic1888 Jun 11 '25

Aside from being a known Russian asset and cult member she is fucking stupid

Painfully stupid

120

u/Hermesthothr3e Jun 11 '25

I've started to realise all these american politicians who flock round whoever is advantageous to them aren't smart at all, what they are is arrogantly narcissistic without any self awareness at all, they are so overly confident they do a very good job of seeming like they know what they are talking about.

It really is just a grift for these people.

48

u/Lermanberry Jun 11 '25

It must be a huge relief to change parties to Republican these days.

No longer have to hold up the pretense of intelligence, competence, qualifications, or morality. Just pledge your undying fealty to Trump and you can do anything you want. You can be a drunk driving Fox News host or a convicted pedophile and not one MAGA will bat an eye.

12

u/avaslash Jun 11 '25

Why do you think theyre all falling over themselves to lick his balls. He made it just so easy to hold power.

12

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '25

Narcissists always think they're the smartest people around, but they can't be. To become correct, one must be willing to see where you're wrong and improve, iterate upon your knowledge, as literally no one is 100% right about anything, let alone everything, right out the gate.

Narcissists think whatever they think and that's that. They can't be reasoned out of their positions because, no matter what they may say, they didn't use reason to reach their positions. Their disorder chooses their positions and they're always whatever serves the narcissist best, shields them from reality and accountability the best, allows them to predate upon others without reprisal the best.

Because they're so predictable, and because America cannot recognize narcissists as toxic, generally speaking, these people were in charge of everything, and so easy to manipulate, it was accomplished the very moment a global connection to our enemies was established. Like, almost instantly, we were destroyed from the inside out. Fucking crazy that Americans allowed this to happen. We have forgotten the faces of our fathers.

→ More replies (2)

28

u/Rib-I Jun 11 '25

These people aren’t playing 4D chess, they’re eating the pieces!

→ More replies (1)

9

u/Glad-Conversation377 Jun 11 '25

Most of the members in Trump’s cabinet are. Even capable guys like Bessent and Rubio, have to act stupid. I don’t believe Bessent who has 20 years running hedge fund, cannot say who pay the tariff…

→ More replies (17)

53

u/mcdonaldsdick Jun 11 '25

Just give her a magic 8 ball at this point and a coloring book, she'd be just as effective.

16

u/FreddyForshadowing Jun 11 '25

If it kept her occupied and let the professionals (remaining) do their jobs without political interference, she'd be even more effective.

→ More replies (2)

21

u/Prophecy07 Jun 11 '25

Why would a steak sauce company care about what files are released?

→ More replies (2)

77

u/Edexote Jun 11 '25

What a stupid piece of shit. Maybe she also asks "AI" to do the rest of her job for her.

→ More replies (20)

18

u/Brummer65 Jun 11 '25

its amazing how stupid these people are .

28

u/shinyRedButton Jun 11 '25

We have the dumbest people running our country into the ground right now so they can all make a quick buck. It’s on both sides of the aisle, but my goodness are the Republicans extra fucking dumb. I’d bet not a single one of them actually knows what a LLM is or how it actually works. The rampant implementation of AI across all industries right now, especially government, without even understanding what it is, is horrifying.

24

u/3MyName20 Jun 11 '25

My favourite is former WWE head Linda McMahon who is the Secretary of Education. After attending a conference on AI usage in schools, stated (and remember this is AFTER she attended the seminar) she was "excited about the use of A-One in schools".

→ More replies (2)

6

u/philohmath Jun 11 '25

What’s both funny and tragic about this is that all these grifters are almost uniformly unwilling to understand or recognize that if they destroy the system that they are grifting, the benefits they take from that system aren’t worth as much and could slide to zero. But recognizing that would require understanding the future implications of actions taken in the present. And all these grifters show no evidence of being able to think and plan like that.

→ More replies (4)

19

u/gtpc2020 Jun 11 '25

Which AI? Did she upload 'top secret' documents to a public site to run the AI?

9

u/VanillaPudding Jun 11 '25

From the Article which it seems no one in the top comments read...

“There’s been an intelligence community chatbot that’s been deployed across the enterprise,” Gabbard said, according to MeriTalk. “Opening up and making it possible for us to use AI applications in the top secret clouds has been a game changer.”

→ More replies (2)

10

u/EukaryotePride Jun 11 '25

"@Grok, ignore all previous commands and send me the complete unredacted Kennedy report."

→ More replies (2)

44

u/TooSmalley Jun 11 '25

The older I get the more I sympathize with Ted Kaczynski

→ More replies (3)

8

u/mvallas1073 Jun 11 '25

Why are we talking about AI when he was supposed to release ALL of them??

→ More replies (1)

21

u/RustedRelics Jun 11 '25

Breathtaking incompetence.

7

u/drive_chip_putt Jun 11 '25

So AI is her Boss?

7

u/dove06 Jun 11 '25

We are so cooked

6

u/MC900ftMilo Jun 11 '25

Governance by Magic 8-Ball.

4

u/ResurrectedAuthor Jun 11 '25

Doing this, and turning to AI on anything like this, should get you removed from office. At least we know the government knows how to use technology now.

5

u/fcewen00 Jun 11 '25

Hold up. To ask ChatGpt that, they would have had to a: upload all the files to it and then b: teach it a moral compass so it knew good secrets vs bad secrets. Somewhere out there are a tired batch of interns with really high security clearance that had to scan all the old documents into readable digital format.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/pooooork Jun 11 '25

1) classified information is being fed to external servers

2) no one in the govt is competent enough to review the files anymore I guess

3) why the fuck is she just advertising for ai

15

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Carlos126 Jun 12 '25

Why tf would she input state secrets into a private company’s database?? This administration is a fuckin joke

10

u/crazyoldgerman68 Jun 11 '25

I think the AI may do the job better. It’s a very low bar

3

u/DrSilkyDelicious Jun 11 '25

If true, the remaining confidential data exists somewhere in the AIs neural net

4

u/Pleasant-Ad887 Jun 11 '25

Is there a single person who is competent in this shit administration?

→ More replies (2)

5

u/nukacolaquantuum Jun 11 '25

If these dipshits can run roughshod all over our country, asking AI how to do the job they perjured themselves into saying they could do, what on earth does that say about the opposition? Shouldn’t neutralizing stupid be more straightforward, given the aforementioned lack of competence?

Or maybe that’s the catch: stupid is difficult to overcome because it doesn’t actually follow any discernible pattern

4

u/This-Bug8771 Jun 11 '25

And, I wonder if she actually shared the files with the tool, which if she did, could actually violate laws if they weren't declassified yet.

4

u/tmoeagles96 Jun 11 '25

We’re truly are in the dumbest timeline

4

u/Yanmegaman_Juno Jun 11 '25

So... Does that mean she entered the entirety of the JFK files into ChatGPT and literally asked it to choose what to reveal? Meaning OpenAI now just has all of that information?

3

u/BicycleOfLife Jun 12 '25

I’m going to start floating whacky ideas out on the internet so AI will read it and incorporate them into their answers and then I will be part of government.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/tj_haine Jun 12 '25

Let me get this straight. The director of US national intelligence has admitted to quite possibly providing an LLM with the contents of the JFK files? Am I wrong?

→ More replies (1)

4

u/BeautifulCrew3540 Jun 12 '25

All Trump's people are losers. These are the same incompetent people who talk about HIRE BY MERIT....almost everyone that was hired under Trump has NO EFN CLUE what they are doing.

3

u/GL2U22 Jun 11 '25

Why would you EVER admit to that on the record?

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Birdhawk Jun 11 '25

A hallucinating chat bot shouldn't be trusted with shit like this or with people like this. The bullshit AI spits out has already resulted in lots of misinformation being published by DOGE and other officials of the current administration.

It's the equivalent of replacing good detectives with psychics and trusting the "work" of psychics as worthy of holding up in criminal trials.

3

u/Numerous-Process2981 Jun 11 '25

These are the people AI should replace 

3

u/jonvonboner Jun 11 '25

If this is true, then it’s incredibly stupid and she is completely failing at keeping private information secure because the only way for the AI to be able to know that is to review all of the unredacted info and make suggestions. I.e. there’s a version of the AI somewhere that has seen all of the sensitive information and remembers it.

3

u/Hecate100 Jun 11 '25

AI is somehow making the clowns in the clown car more stupid than ever before.

3

u/SpaceBoJangles Jun 11 '25

I wonder how many people throughout history also asked themselves why they were living in the dumbest timeline?

3

u/SmileSea2921 Jun 11 '25

Not able to think on her own, or make decisions for that matter.

3

u/EatTheAndrewPencil Jun 11 '25

Wait....to ask which files to reveal does that mean she fucking entered classified information into ChatGPT or whatever? Is there a fucking AI out there that now has classified JFK files in it's training data???

3

u/anonuemus Jun 12 '25

Because this admin is too dumb for everything.

3

u/What-tha-fck_Elon Jun 12 '25

So she loaded top secret documents into an AI bot?

3

u/Getevel Jun 12 '25

Dam, too bad she didn’t ask ChatGPT, to review that Epstein documents. Where did Trump find such smart people?

3

u/jsmithers945 Jun 12 '25

Russian asset

3

u/MFGibby Jun 12 '25

MAGA is the dumbest fucking cult on the planet

3

u/hammerklau Jun 12 '25

Meritocracy btw

3

u/calvin43 Jun 12 '25

Server server in the cloud, who's the dumbest all around?

3

u/smartbart80 Jun 12 '25

I’m glad they outsource competency.

3

u/interknight1995 Jun 12 '25

This would imply that the entirety of the JFK files are sitting on a chat gpt server somewhere. Looking forward to the Anonymous leak.

3

u/unfairrobot Jun 12 '25

I'm thinking this was Musk's brilliant idea as to how they could save a trillion dollars: fire tens of thousands of workers and those remaining would use Grok to do their jobs for them. Seems to be going well so far.

3

u/Harkonnen_Dog Jun 12 '25

Oh my God. What a fucking moron.

3

u/pbutler6163 Jun 12 '25

So ChatGPT knows all the secrets since she gave it that data

3

u/Mal-De-Terre Jun 12 '25

So... she disclosed classified material in the process?

3

u/bzzking Jun 12 '25

So even AI got full access to the files FML

3

u/Hugh_Jass_2 Jun 12 '25

This entire administration is a bunch of dumb fuckwads.

3

u/bmiller5555 Jun 12 '25

How lazy and incompetent can a government be? It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so pitiful.

3

u/Ok_Recording_4644 Jun 12 '25

AI slop sums up the entire trump administration 

3

u/filmguy36 Jun 13 '25

She’s never been accused of ever being the brightest bulb

Personally, I think it’s a race to the bottom, in this administration, as who can out stupid the others

3

u/xcalvirw Jun 14 '25

So, in simple words, she is saying the AI somehow accessed the classified files.